It will not be repetitive, in the movie-going public eyes, because the love interest in a Superhero movie has never been given superpowers by the hero before. I can count exceptions easier than the normals: Jean Grey, Elektra, Catwoman, and those characters all met their respective love interest heroes AFTER getting superpowers, not before. This will be the first time a love interest has been upgraded from non-combatant to super-powered combatant in the third installment. So, new.

And your argument that it will be repetitive because so many people have armor would apply to the X-Men franchise as well, but that has not gotten redundant by too many characters having mutant powers.

um....what?

An armored battlesuit is a very specific superpower. Being "mutant" is not specific at all, and just means you got your superpowers genetically. Doesn't mean everybody at Xavier's school has adamantium claws, or mastery over the weather. Not even remotely comparable to everyone wearing the spring collection of Tony Stark knockoffs.

I would like to see the Extremis tech used to save her life and makes her a bit of a cyborg.

__________________Beliefs - Christian. Anti-Republican. Anti-Gun. Complete separation of church and state. Freedom of speech. Freedom to practice any religion in public. Less focus on foreign lands and more focus on our own problems.

How will Rescue not be "repetitive?" War Machine/Iron Patriot has armor; Firepower has armor; Coldblood may well have armor; the Chinese are rumored to have a whole national team of armors; hell, Mandarin might have armor; Tony will have no less than *forty-seven* armors.....again: how will Rescue armor not be repetitive and redundant? ****, let's give EVERYBODY in this movie armor, even Happy frickin' Hogan.

... if you have 55 suits of armor going on already, then #56 isn't really going to be any more redundant or repetitive than #55, y'know?

That's it. Not sure why people persist with this argument that every character will want their own armour like Happy Hogan. Idiotic argument.

I don't really get why people are afraid of Pepper in a suit,when you know darn well,she's not going to fly off on missions.I guarantee if she doesn't wear the armor,you'll have another whole segment of fans who will gripe "she was a damsel in distress!" so whatever they do,it's bound to tick someone off.

So Tony bring 47 + suits in one scene but it's ridiculous to think he would build one for the woman he loves.

Considering that list of armours only over two movies, then yeah, some people may see that as too much. One of the more common criticisms I've seen about IM2 was that it was just another lame armour on armour fight and many have expressed not wanting to see the same for this one. So it would seem that many aren't that keen on too many armours (though I can only imagine how some may react if the Chinese heroes are confirmed to have armours and when all the villains are revealed for this movie).

Plus as I've said before, giving Pepper her own armour is a cheap way out of danger and changes the nature of her character, she is fine the way she is, there's no need to ruin that. Not to mention if you're going to give Tony's love interest her own suit of armour because he wants to protect those close to him, then it opens up the possibility of Happy Hogan or anyone else close to Tony getting their own armour.

__________________
Lady Luck is smiling at me. She knows something I don't.

Avi Arad was to Spider-man what Jon Peters was like to Superman. Which makes Venom his giant effin' spider.

Is that selfish? Maybe. But he's made it a point in both the MCU and the comics universe to jealously and vigorously defend his technology. He certainly doesn't want the bad guys to get hold of that tech; he doesn't want business rivals to get that tech and make money off it; he doesn't want ANY government or military to weaponize it; he doesn't even want his best friend to have it. So if he decides to give that tech to his girlfriend because he doesn't want his main squeeze scratching a nail or something, then that cheapens everything he stands for.

Is that selfish? Maybe. But he's made it a point in both the MCU and the comics universe to jealously and vigorously defend his technology. He certainly doesn't want the bad guys to get hold of that tech; he doesn't want business rivals to get that tech and make money off it; he doesn't want ANY government or military to weaponize it; he doesn't even want his best friend to have it. So if he decides to give that tech to his girlfriend because he doesn't want his main squeeze scratching a nail or something, then that cheapens everything he stands for.

Is that selfish? Maybe. But he's made it a point in both the MCU and the comics universe to jealously and vigorously defend his technology. He certainly doesn't want the bad guys to get hold of that tech; he doesn't want business rivals to get that tech and make money off it; he doesn't want ANY government or military to weaponize it; he doesn't even want his best friend to have it. So if he decides to give that tech to his girlfriend because he doesn't want his main squeeze scratching a nail or something, then that cheapens everything he stands for.

Tony made the War Machine armor after he was dead. Or presumed dead. It was a contingency plan to keep Iron Man operating in the event of Tony's death; not some frivolous decision to give his buddy a nifty suit of armor. And the Rescue Armor came about as a result of Pepper's near death, when Tony stuck an arc reactor in her chest to keep her alive. With the arc reactor in place, he built a functioning suit of armor for her to use.

Neither case is even remotely comparable to what happens to the MCU versions of Rhodey and Pepper. MCU Rhodey commandeered a suit without Tony's permission, and it remains to be seen in IM3 how Tony responds to that. And if MCU Pepper winds up getting the same damn arc reactor that Tony uses to keep her alive and an identical suit of armor --- in other words, she becomes "Iron Woman" --- audiences (both fanboy and general audiences alike) are going to bail on this franchise like rats off the Titanic.

Tony made the War Machine armor after he was dead. Or presumed dead. It was a contingency plan to keep Iron Man operating in the event of Tony's death; not some frivolous decision to give his buddy a nifty suit of armor. And the Rescue Armor came about as a result of Pepper's near death, when Tony stuck an arc reactor in her chest to keep her alive. With the arc reactor in place, he built a functioning suit of armor for her to use.

Neither case is even remotely comparable to what happens to the MCU versions of Rhodey and Pepper. MCU Rhodey commandeered a suit without Tony's permission, and it remains to be seen in IM3 how Tony responds to that. And if MCU Pepper winds up getting the same damn arc reactor that Tony uses to keep her alive and an identical suit of armor --- in other words, she becomes "Iron Woman" --- audiences (both fanboy and general audiences alike) are going to bail on this franchise like rats off the Titanic.

That’s a gross over statement. People’s reaction to Pepper acquiring and wearing the Rescue suit will be dictated by how well the story elements around it are handled. If the story is deep then people will accept it but if its just a shallow armor reveal that’s just a plot device then people will right it off .

__________________

Quote:

What is the most indestructable thing in the avengers? Ironman's suit, Captain America's Shield, or Thor's Hammer?﻿ The correct answer is Hulk's Pants

That’s a gross over statement. People’s reaction to Pepper acquiring and wearing the Rescue suit will be dictated by how well the story elements around it are handled. If the story is deep then people will accept it but if its just a shallow armor reveal that’s just a plot device then people will right it off .

I'm a bit confused. You think the claim is laughable, but then go on to say it's a good possibility.

__________________
Lady Luck is smiling at me. She knows something I don't.

Avi Arad was to Spider-man what Jon Peters was like to Superman. Which makes Venom his giant effin' spider.

I'm a bit confused. You think the claim is laughable, but then go on to say it's a good possibility.

He's saying its going to be a 100% fail no mater what and I'm saying its all about the execution.

The whole thing kind of reminds me of the pre-Thor chatter. Some people where saying if Thor spins his hammer in order to take off and fly that it would look silly and shouldn't be included in the movie. They would say it with absolute conviction. It got so hyperbolic that people would started saying it as if it was included that there would be a 100% chance that the movie would fail. It looks like its happening again with the Rescue Armor. It's the 100% automatic fail talk that turns me off. From my point of view its all about the execution of introducing the Armor and not the Armor it self. It may look silly to some people but if executed right it might be awesome.

Example:
The comic book X-men are more popular than comic book Avengers but the movie Avengers are more popular than the movie X-men. The reason for that is because the Avengers movie was executed better than the X-men movies. There where also so people saying the Avenger would fail because all the heroes would look so out of place together. The movie ended up being executed so well that no one in the GA cared that the team consisted of a World War 2 super soldier and a Norse God and that it was set in the present day.

__________________

Quote:

What is the most indestructable thing in the avengers? Ironman's suit, Captain America's Shield, or Thor's Hammer?﻿ The correct answer is Hulk's Pants

He's saying its going to be a 100% fail no mater what and I'm saying its all about the execution.

*I* said that? Show me where I said that.

I said that *if* it turns out to follow Matt Fraction's storyline, then Pepper Potts becomes quite literally "Iron Woman" --- same arc reactor in her chest, same suit, same change of focus from CEO to superheroine. And *if* that's the route they take with Rescue, then fanboys, general audiences, and movie critics alike are going to cry "ripoff" and IM3 will get the same negative press as its predecessor.

If it's just a one-time case of Pepper putting on one of Tony's suits in a scene to help him out of a big jam when his back is to the wall, I don't think anybody's gonna balk. It's the idea of turning Pepper into something she's not --- i.e., a superhero --- that would have audiences rolling their eyes.

I think making Rescue makes a lot of sense since the trailer does have him worried about mortality. It's not just his own mortality but also being able to protect what he can't live without...Pepper. The thing about New York isn't just how much he came close to death but losing Coulson who had become one of his few inner circle people...I think he'd be extra paranoid not to let that happen again.

The thing about New York isn't just how much he came close to death but losing Coulson who had become one of his few inner circle people...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just one more

Good call there about Coulson. I was a huge fan of his and Tony's relationship throughout the series and I believe that his death would have really hit Tony hard.

For me, the guy was a link to Shield, but other that that I really don´t think he was much on Stark´s radar. The Avengers really overdramatised his death for the sake of bringing everyone together, which looked weird IMO, since he couldn´t have been the only casualty of the attack. The scenes with Steve and Tony talking about him would have been so much better if they had had some sort of pre-established relationship outside of "He annoyed me" and "He had a fanboy crush on me". Since the guy was no Yinsen and no Bucky, and didn´t register as specially important before his death, I remember mostly thinking they were sad about ALL THE VICTIMS until the script made it clear it was only about Coulson.